Kudos to EA for standing up for same sex relationships in video games despite outrage from some religious fuckwits and retarded reprobates.

Here's an extract from the article:

EA has been inundated in recent weeks with what GamesIndustry International understands to be "several thousand" letters and emails protesting the inclusion of same sex or LGBT (lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender) content in its video games, most notably Mass Effect 3 and Star Wars: The Old Republic. When asked, EA confirmed that this has indeed been occurring, and unsurprisingly, EA has no plans to censor any of its games.

"Every one of EA's games includes ESRB content descriptors so it's hard to believe anyone is surprised by the content. This isn't about protecting children, it's about political harassment," Jeff Brown, VP of corporate communications told us.

The letters have been directed to EA's executive team, creative heads, its board of directors and just about anyone at a high level. Many of them threaten to boycott EA's titles if the publisher refuses to remove same-sex relationship content.

[...]

The games are not for children, nor do they force LGBT content on a player - it's merely an option for gamers who wish to replicate their real-life sexual orientation.

[...]

"EA has not been pressured by any groups to include LGBT characters in our games. However, we have met with LBGT groups and sponsored industry forums to discuss content and harassment of players in online forums. In short, we do put options for same-sex relationships in our games; we don't tolerate hate speech on our forums."

[...]

Speaking to the larger issue at hand for the industry and LGBT content in video games, Kane remarked, "A lot of game makers are realizing that in order to create a believable universe it has to be a universe that is very diverse, and in some ways it sort of reflects the make-up of the culture we live in as well. I think it's very logical that you'll start to see more LGBT characters appearing in games."

[...]

"As in all media, there remains work to do in order for more people to feel represented and included. This is true for video games and for LGBT people. EA's step in this instance is indicative of a continuing cultural shift toward greater inclusion," he said.

10
commentaires:

As much as I hate to see such open homophobia, it's re-assuring in a way. Their desperate, futile, hateful reaction reminds me that they're on the losing side of a cause that has been advancing at a rapid pace, and in five years, they'll just be a much smaller collection of bigots that even the Republicans will be embarrassed to associate with.

As a gay guy I find this extremely comforting. I am so glad that EA Games are not backing down due to pressure from religious (and other) idiots. LGBT people are as much a part of the community as anyone else and censoring them from games under the guise of protecting children is ridiculous. It insinuates that there is something wrong with it - which look, I shouldn't be surprised because so many people still believe it to be 'wrong'. But really it's almost like saying 'I don't want my white Christian child playing video games with black people in them - it is harmful for their little white supremest psyche. Please censor all black people'.

I find it amusing that premarital sex, gratuitous depictions of women, ability to play murderers and thieves, or even lesbian fetish has never seemed to be a problem for gamers, but when LGBT *relationships* are in play suddenly everyone remembers the coating of morality they checked at the door when they booted up these games.

As a gay guy, I was thrilled when I could play my character exactly as I wanted to in the Fable games and in Dragon Age. But it wasn't forced on anyone - it was an option to pursue with NPC characters. It's not like there have been random gratuitous gay sex scenes popping up, nor have players been forced to have their characters enter into a "relationship" with a same sex partner in these games.

I find it very funny and more than a tad ironic that these people get upset about the inclusion of optional gay content in games that their kids play, but they appear to be significantly less vocal or silent about the violence, gun-play, numerous depictions of very skantily clad busty girl-women and blood and gore that pop up in many titles these days. Their argument is idiotic on its face and extremely hypocritical. To the best of my knowledge, the games they're complaining about have all received an "M" rating from the ESRB, which means their precious little snowflakes shouldn't be playing these games at all. They're not intended for children. It speaks volumes about their bad parenting that they let their children play games that are patently not intended for anyone under 18, but then they complain about the inclusion of optional gay content. The only ones responsible for their children being exposed to content they find objectionable are their moronic selves. (By the by, it pisses me off that gay content automatically receives an "M" rating, even if there is absolutely no sexual content involved with a gay character.)

Pat I'm disappointed that you choose to use the word "retarded" in your campaign against hate. I find it ironic that you call for tolerance with such a hurtful word. Makes me doubt your objectivity in your reviews...

Can't believe I'm saying this after all the DRM crap they pull, but bravo EA.

As to the religious homophobic nuts out there, it's amusing that you have no problem a characters engaging in widespread murder, violence, genocide, and other abuses, but find it offensive and dangerous to children that that same character could enter a mutually loving relationship with a member of the same (or alien) sex. Methinks your priorities are in need of serious reassessment.

Off topic, but thought I should add ... b4rton, while I totally support your view, technically the definition of retarded is 'slow or limited in intellectual or emotional development or academic progress' which when used in Pat's context, was totally applicable. I don't think we should 'ban' words that are being used in an appropriate context. It's only when they are used hatefully against people with disabilities that it's a problem.

I don't think you can judge someone and reprimand them for using the word innocently enough. It's about the intention behind it, not the word itself. I'm gay, and I don't bat an eye when someone says 'that's so gay' because I know being homophobic isn't their intention.

Sorry for the long rant, just a bit over people being over-the-top-PC these days.

As a christian myself and someone who do not agree with homosexuality due to my belief, I am still revolted and shocked by the attitude of religious fanatics who should teach love, respect and tolerance. Even though I think homosexuality as a sin ( Before you throw stones at me, just remember to be open-minded yourselves and respectful of other people beliefs) I have several gay friends and my aunt is a lesbian. I love them deeply and show nothing but support and love, because what most christians fails to remember is to remember what they should do, and that is being tolerant, show respect. I mean let's face it, if homosexuality is a sin, who am I to talk, i'm a sinner too you know.

So what I'm trying to say is that I'm really frustrated by how religious people are acting, it is sad and quite frankly embarrassing for those who do not act like that. So please remember guys, not all religious people are like that. Not all christians, hindus, muslims etc are religious idiotic freaks and savages.